Hospital official says one dead, 19 injured after car plows into a group of protesters in downtown C

[Bobk]

Got some news for you, both sides were POS. It was a group effort.

Davetex how right you are!

 

[MTA]

Got some news for you, both sides were POS. It was a group effort.

Apparently only the nazis were being trash. The commies and antifa scumbags are perfect little angels. I mean their track record of rioting, looting and beating unarmed people will certainly exonerate them of any wrongdoing.

 

[Davetex]

One side committed murder.

One nut committed murder.

 

[orbitup]

But you can legally murder them if they do? Thats the argument of the dictator.

Is punching Nazis (anyone to their right) okay? Punching today, killing tomorrow.

Sent from my P00C using Tapatalk

 

[easy rider]

Tens of thousands of people protested those racist pieces of shit. You think people protesting Nazis are antiAmerican? The ghosts of Patton, Eisenhower, and my grandad's would like to have a word...

I care about Nazis about as much as I care about Antifa. The bill of rights protects protesting, yes, but it doesn't protect those looking for a fight. Both sides came looking for a fight, that's not a protest, that's a riot and the bill of rights does not protect rioting.

 

[Younggun]

Over time I've come to reason that my initial defense of the driver was erroneous.

I'll also say that being a "nazi" as some have labeled him should not really be relevant. The only relevant is his motivation for driving down that street at high speed.


And lastly, how the hell can certain people argue about whether or not nazis or socialist are a bigger threat? Do we not know what the NAZI party was? "National Socialist German Workers" party.

I figured after this much time some of the hyperbole could die down and maybe some rational thought could go in to some of these posts. Instead we are still stuck on "antifa wanted a fight" or "nazis need to go to jail".

Do we even know if everyone in that group was Antifa, or just some snowflake college retards wanting to argue with some alt right retards?

 

[easy rider]

Over time I've come to reason that my initial defense of the driver was erroneous.

I'll also say that being a "nazi" as some have labeled him should not really be relevant. The only relevant is his motivation for driving down that street at high speed.


And lastly, how the hell can certain people argue about whether or not nazis or socialist are a bigger threat? Do we not know what the NAZI party was? "National Socialist German Workers" party.

I figured after this much time some of the hyperbole could die down and maybe some rational thought could go in to some of these posts. Instead we are still stuck on "antifa wanted a fight" or "nazis need to go to jail".

Do we even know if everyone in that group was Antifa, or just some snowflake college retards wanting to argue with some alt right retards?

All I can say is if I went to a protest and a riot broke out, if I stayed knowing that, whatever happens to me is on me.

 

[Charlie Primero]

Both sides came looking for a fight, that's not a protest, that's a riot and the bill of rights does not protect rioting.

False. The rally organizers had a permit to march. According to an Independent Review, the Charlottesville Chief of Police told his Officers to stand down an let the Communists attack the marchers...

https://news.vice.com/story/charlot...ops-to-let-them-fight-when-nazis-came-to-town

Have some respect for the U.S. Constitution. Please stop repeating the lies of your Fake News outlets.

 

[easy rider]

False. The rally organizers had a permit to march. According to an Independent Review, the Charlottesville Chief of Police told his Officers to stand down an let the Communists attack the marchers...

https://news.vice.com/story/charlot...ops-to-let-them-fight-when-nazis-came-to-town

Have some respect for the U.S. Constitution. Please stop repeating the lies of your Fake News outlets.

And those clubs they had were for ...... effect?

 

[Younggun]

False. The rally organizers had a permit to march. According to an Independent Review, the Charlottesville Chief of Police told his Officers to stand down an let the Communists attack the marchers...

https://news.vice.com/story/charlot...ops-to-let-them-fight-when-nazis-came-to-town

Have some respect for the U.S. Constitution. Please stop repeating the lies of your Fake News outlets.

I just read the independent review at the link you posted to page 147. From your own link, it sure seems like the Alt Right and KKK protesters were the first to become violent, and were responsible for initiating the majority of the violence that day.

So in reality, the police spent more time standing down and allowing the Unite group to attack counter protesters than they did letting the "communists" attack the "marchers".

Did you actually read the independent review you linked?

 

[Charlie Primero]

Did you actually read the independent review you linked?

No. What page tells you that the Communists did not show up to a permitted rally and attack the First Amendment marchers?

 

[Younggun]

No. What page tells you that the Communists did not show up to a permitted rally and attack the First Amendment marchers?

Firstly, how about weave intellectually honest and view the situation without the biased lens.

Your review states multiple times that the "first amendment marchers" were not chanting anything about free speech or carrying free speech banners, but were instead chanting white nationalist slogans and carrying white nationalist flags.

If you are going to label the marchers based on a belief then you should be calling it it "communists vs racists" or something. You're attempts to paint the Unite the Right marchers as choir boys simply out marching for the 1A is laughable. The Alt Right is just as retarded as the progressive left with almost identical motivations.


Unite the Rigjt speakers were supposed to be escorted in by law enforcement in order to avoid confrontation, but instead they mislead local law enforcement about their intentions and at the last minute told LE they would be walking in through crowds of counter protestors. (P.124)

Description is an early scuffle broken up by troopers.


"From Peyton’s perspective, it appeared that the Unite The Right demonstrators had focused their aggression on a middle-aged black man. As the troopers approached, the Unite The Right demonstrators took off running and darted through the FUMC parking lot. They laughed among themselves and shouted, “You want some more?” (P.127)


The first big clash came when counter protesters blocked a street. They didn't act violently or throw rocks as the marchers came up the road, they stood in the street. The marchers then started jabbing flag poles at their faces and knocking them down with large wooden shields. I would call that being physically aggressive. (P.130)

Lots of that throughout the review. But what about after the event was called unlawful and people told to leave?

"Seeing the VSP field force begin to disperse the park, a small group of Unite The Right demonstrators, including Richard Spencer, attempted to resist by locking arms and refusing to leave the park. A handful were taken into custody, and the rest eventually gave way and left the park. As the wall of shields moved closer to the fights in the southern half of the park, VSP troopers deployed OC spray to disperse the crowd." (P.135)

So the Unite group doesn't care if they are there lawfully either...the event was in violation of rules regarding "peaceful protest" and ended, yet they felt they could stay regardless of no longer being a sanctioned event...interesting.



"An unprovoked assault happened at that same corner, shortly before or after the Long- Preston interaction. The victim, a counter-protester who asked to remain anonymous, told us she was standing about where Preston had fired his gun, and she was yelling at the demonstrators as they walked by. One Unite The Right demonstrator walked up to her and punched her in the face. She provided us with a video of the incident, which shows the incident as she described. The victim of this assault told us that after she was punched, she stumbled up to the state troopers standing at the barricades to ask for help. None of them responded. She later learned she suffered a concussion.327 " P.136

Certainly sound like good people to me...just there for free speech and cookies.



I have things I've got to do today, but this could go on for pages. Alt retards were no better than those who showed up to protest them and from your own link it was they who initialted the majority of the violence that day. I was able to find everything posted while reading the article on my phone, If I actually fired up my computer it would be embarrassingly easy to retrieve a books worth of evidence showing that free speech was not the prime motivation for the event and the alt rightards had no intention of avoiding violence.

 

[Younggun]

Also, asking me to prove a negative is a weak ass defense.

 

[Charlie Primero]

Firstly, how about weave intellectually honest

The rally organizers had a permit to march. According to the Review, the Charlottesville Chief of Police told his Officers to stand down and let the Communists attack the marchers...

https://news.vice.com/story/charlot...ops-to-let-them-fight-when-nazis-came-to-town

The Chief knew he could circumvent the Marchers legal permit if he let the Communist Antifa attack the permit holders, which is exactly what he did.

I wish you would support the U.S. Constitution instead of struggling to find excuses for Marxists who want to destroy America.

 

[Younggun]

The rally organizers had a permit to march. According to the Review, the Charlottesville Chief of Police told his Officers to stand down and let the Communists attack the marchers...

https://news.vice.com/story/charlot...ops-to-let-them-fight-when-nazis-came-to-town

The Chief knew he could circumvent the Marchers legal permit if he let the Communist Antifa attack the permit holders, which is exactly what he did.

I wish you would support the U.S. Constitution instead of struggling to find excuses for Marxists who want to destroy America.

Straw man much?


If you read the report, and by read I mean actually look at all of He information presented and comprehend how it fits together, you'll find that the officers spent more time letting marchers initiate physical violence against counter protesters (also not majority Antifa by your own posted independent review).

If fact, the independent review YOU posted states specifically that Antifa were urged by counter protesters not to act violently and Antifa members agreed stating that they would take no action of physical violence unless attacked first.

You seem to be stuck in a mentality that because these leftists are idiots the people they get in fights with must be saints. That's wholly incorrect.

The constitution protects peaceful protest. The people who came to the permitted event acted with physical aggression against the counter protestors. They did not act defensively in most cases listed in YOUR linked review, and were the aggressors in most instances where it could be determined who initiated the conflict.

YOU asked me for evidence and page number, I posted multiple examples AND the page numbers as well as direct quotes from the review.

You might also note that the request for Kesslers permit did not include any marches. He did not request a permit to hold the torchlight marches OR the march in to the park which he took part in after misleading law enforcement and making it more difficult for them to prevent clashes between the groups.

"On May 30, Jason Kessler filed a Special Event Application Request with the City, seeking a permit to hold a demonstration at Emancipation Park on August 12, 2017—an event he dubbed “Unite The Right” on social media. His permit described the event as a “free speech rally in support of the Lee Monument” and estimated that 400 participants would attend. He wrote that the rally would last from 12:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m." (P.69)

You gave us a wonderful review that details the entire event far better than any snippets from news articles, yet when I use information taken directly from that review you choose to rebut it with Vice news articles. Why not just stick with the highly detailed source YOU provided us? It's by far the most detailed compilation of the events leading up to and including the day of the event, as well as the aftermath. Yet you have suddenly chose to ignore it because it's not fitting the narrative you want to push.

You are being intellectually dishonest and have come to the point that you feel the need to claim people who disagree based on the facts presented by your source refuse to support the constitution. What a ridiculous notion. You wouldn't even address the evidence YOU asked for, given with not only the page number as you requested but also quotes from the page.

You've obviously given up on intellectual honesty in favor of supporting the narrative you've invested in, and now you attack anyone who doesn't stay in lock step.

In this case there were failures of law enforcement to adequately plan for and maintain a situation where to groups of retards clashed over equally retarded ideas. The claim of constitutionally protected peaceful assembly went out the window when they started physically attacking the counter protestors. The argument of one side having a permit gets corrupted by the fact that they initiated context with the counter protestors during marches which weren't included in the permits.

The argument that law enforcement stood by and let the permitted marchers get attacked when you read the review and see that it was the permitted marchers who initiated the majority of the attacks and WERE NOT arrested by law enforcement despite the pleas of the counter protesters for law enforcement to intervene.


So based on the independent review you so kindly have us it can only be concluded that your entire argument is based on a false premise of which you refuse to acknowledge despite you being the one who posted the evidence that proves it to be wrong.


It's fine with me, this is a public forum and open for millions to read. Hopefully it will help some realize that the Alt Right care nothing about free speech or equality. They simply feed on the frustrations of average Americans in order to boost their numbers and further an agenda parallel to that of the left.

It's the horse shoe theory of politics.

 

[easy rider]

They had 1st amendment rights to protest, but once they started swinging at others, the 1st amendment no longer applies.

 

[Charlie Primero]

The constitution protects peaceful protest. The people who came to the permitted event acted with physical aggression against the counter protestors.

I took your advice and read more of the report than just the part about the Police Chief ordering a stand-down so he could declare it an unlawful assembly instead of protecting the free speech marchers from being attacked by Antifa Communists.

You cherry-picked text containing instances when marchers hit counter-protesters and left out the paragraphs about how the Communists blocked streets and attacked Police. You left out the parts describing how they stopped the Unite The Right marchers from entering the venue and exiting the venue, and all other instances of them attacking.

Very dishonest.

 

[Younggun]

I took your advice and read more of the report than just the part about the Police Chief ordering a stand-down so he could declare it an unlawful assembly instead of protecting the free speech marchers from being attacked by Antifa Communists.

You cherry-picked text containing instances when marchers hit counter-protesters and left out the paragraphs about how the Communists blocked streets and attacked Police. You left out the parts describing how they stopped the Unite The Right marchers from entering the venue and exiting the venue, and all other instances of them attacking.

Very dishonest.

Standing in the street is not a physical attack, its standing in the street. I also said the "majority" of incidents where it was possible to conclude who initiated physical violence were started by the alt right marchers. I didn't say all, because I don't need to be dishonest as my only goal is to stick to what actually happened.

I won't try to figure out a specific event, if there is a specific event you believe I was dishonest about post the page number as I did.

Also, you claim "Police Chief ordering a stand-down so he could declare it an unlawful assembly instead of protecting the free speech marchers", that is your opinion. It's not stated as a finding of the review. You are confusing what you want to believe with what the review actually says. If not, please provide the page number and I will retract this statement.

You see, I'm more concerned with my own integrity than any agenda. This is why I've had to adjust my view on this situation as more information came to light. This thread highlights that as I've made major changes to my opinion of the events that day. I had learned enough to question how innocent the "free speech marchers" were, and when I decided to read the report you posted it became very clear that the free speech marchers were not interested in avoiding any physical confrontations, nor did they seem to be there in the interest of free speech (based on the chants during their marches primarily having nothing to do with free speech). You want to label me an Antifa sympathizer but you fail to realize it is was your own review, one in which you admit you had only read what you believed to support your case, that convinced me the alt right marchers were twisting the narrative in the same way as the regressive leftists. It's propaganda, just like the leftists use.

I've made no claims that LE handled the situation well, I've made no claim that the counter protesters are innocent, I've only refuted this false narrative you are pushing that claims the Alt Right group was the victim of a violent group attacking them throughout the day while they were simply trying to peacefully assemble with shields, torches, and poles.

Again, if you feel I'm being dishonest give page numbers, copy/paste quotes, offer something to back it up. I read the report, then I went over it again to cite the information I posted. Your only rebuttals is "they stood in the street". There were very few of any instances of Antifa actually attacking law enforcement. Far more notations of counter protesters asking that the police take action when members of the Alt Right groups became physically combative with them.

Honestly, I'm not that concerned about permits and who had them. I'm not a fan of requiring a permit for free speech. I don't mind the Alt Right speaking because when they speak they give away how little they actually care about the constitution and the true nature of their movement, just like the leftist. Let them talk and people will walk away shaking their heads.

 

[Charlie Primero]

"Police Chief ordering a stand-down so he could declare it an unlawful assembly instead of protecting the free speech marchers", that is your opinion. It's not stated as a finding of the review.

It's on page 133.

Anyone can see the hundreds of videos on YouTube showing Antifa attacking Police and free speech marchers.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=charlottesville+antifa+attack+police

All public demonstrations like this 2A March are propaganda events. You seem like a smart guy, so it's weird that you don't understand what the purpose of the Unite the Right rally was.

You are unfamiliar with this propaganda event in general. You have not listened to the hundreds of hours of discussion before-hand on Alt-Right Radio and TheRightStuff.biz where organizers detailed the purpose and goals. You have not watched 100 videos of the event. You don't even really know what the Alt-Right is.

I understand your apathy. The vast majority of people in America share it, and there's nothing wrong with that. I don't because I have been fascinated by extreme political movements for a long time, so I have been studying the Alt-Right closely for two years.

 

[BRD@66]

Just checking in

√ N
to make sure you guys are all right.
Carry on.